臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：英文及中文附加問句之語料分析
作者：吳泰良 引用關係
校院名稱：國立高雄師範大學
系所名稱：英語學系
指導教授：莊永山
蘇碧瓊
學位類別：博士
出版日期：2011
主題關鍵詞：附加問句；極性；文體；語料；語料語言學；共通語法；優選理論；性別差異；共變數分析；tag questions；polarity；genre；corpus；corpus linguistics；universal grammar；Optimality Theory；gender difference；ANCOVA
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:38
本論文研究旨在統計分析從西元1951年至2010年間，在不同的文體之書面語料中，英文及中文之附加問句的相似性與差異性，並探討高中生在附加問句的使用上是否有性別的差異，進而找出學生在使用附加問句上的困難。本研究所蒐集的語料主要來自於4個語料庫，包括英國國家語料庫（BNC），美式英語語料庫（COHA），北京大學中國語言學研究中心語料庫（CCL）及中央研究院平衡語料庫（Sinica Corpus）。本研究有助於語言教師對英文及中文附加問句有更進一步的了解，並有助於幫助其學生提升聽力與口語的溝通能力。
本研究所蒐集的語料是包括英文與中文各6000筆的附加問句。除了三個主要的語料庫外，本研究者也蒐集了中學的英語教科書及各種不同文學作品裡所出現的附加問句。而本研究所設計的測驗卷裡的附加問句經由2位外籍英文教師和2位中文教師所校訂與修改過。本研究共有284位受試者。受試者來自以漢語為母語的一年級高中學生。每位學生以一堂課50分鐘的時間作答測驗卷並由任課的英文敎師監考。測驗完成後，本研究者將測驗結果進行統計分析。
基於質與量的數據統計分析，其結果歸納如下：
一、附加問句的類型隨著時代的不同而在使用頻率上也有顯著差異。
二、英文的附加問句在使用上的頻率高低順序是Positive-Negative > Negative-Positive > Positive-Positive > Negative-Negative。而中文的附加問句在使用上的頻率高低順序是Positive-Positive > Negative-Positive > Positive-Negative > Negative-Negative。
三、英文及中文附加問句在結構和使用方面，確實有共通語法(Universal Grammar)的存在，並且可用優選理論(Optimality Theory)來說明其差異性。
四、男女生在附加問句測驗的表現上並沒有顯著的差異。
五、學生對於有表達「要求」或「邀請」的語用功能的附加問句和結構複雜(complex sentence)的附加問句，在做答及判斷上犯錯率較高。而包含否定語義字的附加問句也會使學生容易犯錯。
根據本研究的發現與討論，本研究者對語言教師在附加問句的教學上提供一些教學建議，以期增進學生的聽力與口語的溝通能力。此外，本研究者希望本研究的成果對於語料語言學、理論語言學及英語教學之研究有所啟發與貢獻。
This study mainly aimed to examine the similarity and difference between English and Chinese tag questions in literary texts or corpora that were written in the years from 1950s to 2000s, randomly selected from some online linguistic corpora—the British National Corpus (BNC), the Corpus of Historical American English (COHA), the Corpus of the Center for Chinese Linguistics (CCL) at PKU and the Academia Sinica Balanced Corpus of Modern Chinese (Sinica Corpus). The contribution of the study to the language field indicated that language teachers could have a deeper understanding of tag questions in English and Chinese so as to help students enhance their listening and speaking ability in language communication.
The corpora in the present study consisted of 6000 English and 6000 Chinese tag questions collected from high school textbooks, literary works and online corpora. The tag question items were designed based on these corpora and were revised by two native speakers. In addition, there were 284 subjects selected for this research. They studied at senior high schools in Kaohsiung City. All the students were required to take the test. Moreover, statistical measures and quantitative analysis were employed to investigate the similarity and difference between English and Chinese tag questions and the variable of gender difference in male and female students’ performance on the tag questions test.
The major findings of this study were summarized as follows:
First, the use or occurrence of English and Chinese tag questions in different periods of time actually varied with different polarity types.
Second, the tendencies in the frequency distribution of polarity types of both English and Chinese tag questions showed that in Chinese the percentage hierarchy is P-P > N-P > P-N > N-N, while the hierarchy in English was P-N > N-P > P-P > N-N.
Third, although there were differences between English and Chinese tag questions, Universal Grammar was found to exist in the use of English and Chinese tag questions, which was manifested with the OT regulation.
Fourth, there was no significant gender difference in male and female students’ performance on the test of the three polarity types of both English and Chinese tag questions. However, taking the three polarity types into consideration, we found the hierarchy of the percentage of three polarity types of English and Chinese tag questions for male and female students: Male: ENP > EPN > EPP; CPN > CNP> CPP vs. Female: ENP > EPN > EPP; CPN > CNP> CPP.
Fifth, tag question that had the function of expressing “request” or “invitation” and that contained an embedded clause so as to form a complex sentence were difficult for students to make judgments on the choice of polarity type Moreover, the use of the word with a negative meaning in the formation of a tag question was also unfamiliar to many students.
The study concluded with a discussion of the implications for the teaching of English tag questions and offered some suggestions for further research. The researcher hopes that the research results can draw corpus linguists’ attention, provoke theoretical linguists’ interest in Optimality Theory-based research on sentence patterns, and further arouse language teachers’ awareness of teaching tag questions.
Aarts, J. (1991). Intuition-based and observation-based grammar. In Aijmer & Altenberg (1991): 44-62.
Aijmer, K. (1979). The function of tag questions in English. In Tore P. (Ed.), Papers from the fifth Scandinavian conference of linguistics (pp. 9-17). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Aijmer, K. (1984). Go to and will in spoken English. In H. Ringbom and M. Oostdijk, N. (1990). The language of dialogue in fiction. Literary and Linguistic.
Akmajian, A., Demers, R., Farmer, A., & Harnish, R. (2001). Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication (fifth edition), MIT Press, Cambridge: Mass.
Algeo, J. (1988). The tag question in British English: It’s different, I’n’it? English
Algeo, J. (1989). It's a myth, innit? Politeness and the English tag question. In C. Ricks & L. Michaels (Eds), The state of the language (pp. 443-450). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Algeo, J. (2006). British or American English? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Arbini, R. (1969). Tag-questions and tag-imperatives in English. Journal of
Archangeli, Diana & Langendoen, D. T. (eds.) (1997) Optimality Theory. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Aston, G. & Burnard, L. (1998). The BNC handbook. Exploring the British National Corpus with SARA. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Atkins, B. T. S., Clear, J., & Ostler, N. (1992). Corpus design criteria. Literacy and Linguistic Computing 7, 1, 1-16. .
Bachman, L., & Palmer, S. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bacon, S. (1992). The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies and cognitive and affective response in second-language listening. Modern Language Journal, 76, 160-178.
Ball, C. N. (1994). The origins of the informative-presupposition it-cleft. Journal of Pragmatics, V 22, (6), 603-628.
Berk, L. M. (1999). English syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus Linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1994). Corpus-based approaches to issues in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 15(2), 169-189.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., & Leech, G. (2000). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Peking: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Binyong, Y., & Felley, M. (1990). Chinese Romanization, pronunciation and orthography. Beijing: Sinolingua. Blackwell.
Bolinger, D. L. (1967). The imperative in English. In R. Jackobson (Ed.), To honor Roman Jackobson (pp. 336-362). The Hague: Mouton.
Brown, C. (1981). “What discourse analysis reveals about tag questions.” Paper presented at the annual TESOL Conference, Detroit, March.
Bublitz, W. (1979). Tag questions, transformational grammar and pragmatics. Papers and Studies in Contrastive Linguistics, 9, 5-22.
Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. (1995). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, D., Fiona, M., & O’leary, K. (1989). Lakoff in context: The social and linguistic functions of tag questions. In J. Coates & D. Cameron (Eds.), Women in their speech communities: New perspectives on language and sex (pp. 126-158). London: Longman.
Cattell, R. (1973). Negative transportation and tag questions. Language, 49(3), 612-693.
Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Chang, C. (2006). Application of politeness theory to tag questions translated from English to Chinese. Unpublished master’s thesis, Providence University, Taiwan.
Chao, Y. R. (1933). Tone and intonation in Chinese. Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philosophy, 4, 121-134.
Chao, Y. R. (1948). Mandarin primer. Mass: Harvard University Press.
Chao, Y. R. (1968). A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Cheng, C. C. (1998). The English word usage (a computer program). ROCMELIA multimedia CD-ROM. Taipei: Crane.
Chomsky, N. (1981). Principles and parameters in syntactic theory. In Hornstein
and Lightfoot (1981). 123-146.
Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin and Use. New York: Praeger.
Chung, S. C. (2000). Statistical analyses of the vocabulary in the English teaching magazines for broadcasting in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Taiwan.
Computing, 5:3, 235–241.
corpus of English writing. London & New York: Routledge.
Davies, M. (2009). The 400 Million Word Corpus of Historical American English (1810-2009). In 16th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, ed. Irén Hegedus, et al. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Doherty, Monika. (1983). Questions and Statements. In Kerfer Ferenc (ed). Questions and Answers. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
Ehrman M.E. & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74, 311-327.
Ehrman, M. & R, Oxford. (1989). Effects of gender differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73(1), 1-13.
Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational, or process, approach to the teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 47, (4), 305-16.
Grabowski, E., & Mindt, D. (1995). A corpus-based learning list of irregular verbs in English. ICAME Journal, 19, 5-22.
Green, G. M. (1996). Pragmatics and natural language understanding. New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Green, J. & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29, 261-297.
Hann, P. de. (1993) Sentence length in running text. In Souter & Atwell (1993). 147-161.
Harris, S. (1984). Questions as a mode of control in magistrates’ courts. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 49, 5–27.
Hayes, B. (2008). Transformations. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles.
Heaton, J. B. (1975). Writing English language tests. London: Longman.
Heine, B., Claudi, U., & Hünnemeyer, F. (1991). Grammaticalization. A conceptual framework. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press.
Hoffmann, S. (2006). Tag questions in Early and Late Modern English. Anglistik, 17 (2), 35-55.
Holmes, J. (1984). The functions of question tags. English Language Research Journal, 3, 40-65.
Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
Hornstein, N. & Lightfoot, D. (eds.) (1981) Explanation in Linguistics.
London: Longman.
Hsin. A. L. (2007). Contrastive study of tag questions between English and Chinese: A viewpoint of syntactic structures. Paper presented at the International Conference on Multi Development and Application of Language and Linguistics (MDALL), Graduate Institute of Foreign Languages and Literature, National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan.
Hu, C. C. (2001). Question tags in Taiwan Mandarin: Discourse functions and grammaticalization. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taiwan.
Huddleston, R. A. (1970). Two approaches to the analysis of tags. Journal of
Hudson, R. A. (1975). The meaning of questions. Language, 51(1), 1-30.
Hughes, A. (1989). Testing for language teachers. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Kager, R. (1990). Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Katz, J. J., & Postal, P. M. (1964). An integrated theory of linguistic descriptions. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Kay, P. (2002). English Subjectless Tagged Sentences. Language 78(3), 453-481.
Kennedy, G.. (1992). Preferred ways of putting things with implications for language teaching. In Svartvik (1992): 335-373.
Kim, J. B., & Ann, J. Y., (2008). English Tag Questions: Corpus Findings and Theoretical Implications. English Language and Linguistics 25, 103-126.
Kim, J., & I, A. S. (2002). Negation without Head Movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20 (2), 339-412.
Kim, J., & Sell, P. (2008). English Syntax: An Introduction. CSLI Publications, Stanford CA.
Kimps, D. (2007). Declarative Constant Polarity Tag Questions: A Datadriven Analysis of Their Form, Meaning and Attitudinal Uses. Journal of Pragmatics 39(2), 270-291
Kirn, E., & Becijos, J. B. (1988). The ETC program: An immigration story. New York: Random House.
Klima, E. (1964). Negation in English. In J.A. Fodor & J. J. Katz (Eds.), The structure of language (pp. 246-323). New York: Prentice Hall.
Kuo, C. H. (2002). Phraseology in scientific research articles. In Selected papers from
the Eleventh international symposium on English teaching (pp. 405-411). Taipei: Crane.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and women’s place. New York: Harper & Row.
Langacker, R. W. (1999). Assessing the Cognitive Linguistic Enterprise. In Theo Janssen and Gisela redeker (eds): Cognitive Linguistics: Fundations, Scope, and Methodology. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Leech, G. (1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. In Svartvik (1992): 105-122.
Legendre, G., Raymond, W. & Smolensky, P.. (1993). An Optimality-Theoretic Typology of Case and Grammatical Voice Systems. In Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society. 464-478.
Levincon, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: CUP.
Li, C. L. (1999). Tag questions in Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng-chi University, Taiwan.
Li, C. N., & Thompson, S. A. (2003). Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Los Angeles: University of California Press.
Linguistics, 5, 205-214.
Linguistics, 6, 215-222.
Lin, J. (1992). The syntax of zenmeyyang ‘How’ and weisheme ‘why’ in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 1, 293-333.
Liu, Y. H. (1996). Modern Chinese grammar. Taipei: Shi-da Publishing.
Lü, S. (1944). Zhongguo wenfa yao lue. (The overview of Chinese grammar). Beijing: Shangwu yinshu guan.
Lü, S. (1985). Interrogation, negation, and affirmation. Zhongguo Yuwen, 4, 241-250.
Marianne, Celece-Marcia & Diane Larsen-Freeman. (1999). The Grammar Book. USA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers, Inc.
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1993) Generalized alignment. In Booji and Marli
(1993). 79-153.
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A. (1994) "The Emergence of the Unmarked: Optimality in Prosodic Morphology," NELS 24, 333-379.
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (Eds.). (2001). Corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
McGregor, W. (1995). The English 'tag question': A new analysis, is(n't) it? In R. Hasan & P. Fries (Eds.), On subject and theme: A discourse functional perspective (pp. 91-121). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mindt, D. (1995). An Empirical Grammar of the English Verb: Modal Verbs. Berlin: Cornelsen.
Mo, J. Q. (1971). A contrastive study of interrogative sentence between English and Mandarin Chinese. Unpublished master’s thesis, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taiwan.
Mparutsa, C., Love, A., & Morrison, A. (1991). Bringing concord to the ESP classroom. English Language Research Journal, 4, 115-133.
Mudraya, O. (2006). Engineering English: A lexical frequency instructional model. English for Specific Purposes, 25, 235-256.
Niu, B. Y. (2005). Belief and Doubt: Epistemology of Tag Questions. Beijing: Chinese Social Science Publisher, Inc.
Norrick, N. R. (1995). Huhn-tags and evidentiality in conversation, Journal of Pragmatics, 23, 687-692.
Nyikos, M. (1990). Gender-related differences in adult language learning: Socialization and memory factors. Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 273-287.
Oostdijk, N. (1991). Corpus Linguistics and the Automatic Analysis of English. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Oostdijk, N. & Haan, P. de (1994). Clause patternss in modern British English. ICAME Journal, 18, 41-80.
Östman, J. O. (1981). A functional approach to English tags. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 13, 3-16.
Oxford R.L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. (1989). Use of language learning strategies: a synthesis of studies with implications for strategy training. System, 17, 235-247.
Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Oxford, R. (1993). Instructional implications of gender differences in language learning styles and strategies. Applied Language Learning, 4, 65-94.
Oxford, R. (1994). Language learning strategies: An Update. [verified 7 Feb 2005] http://www.cal.org/resources/digest/oxford01.html
Oxford, R. (1995). Gender differences in language learning styles: What do they mean? In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. New York: Heinle and Heinle.
Oxford, R. (1996a). Employing a questionnaire to assess the use of language learning strategies. Applied Language Learning, 7, 25-45.
Oxford, R. (1996b). Why is culture important for language learning strategies? in R.L. Oxford (Ed.). Language Learning Strategies around the World: Cross-Cultural Perspectives. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, ix-xv.
Oxford, R., Talbott, V. & Halleck, G. (1990). Language learning strategies, attitudes, motivation, and self-image of students in a university intensive ESL program. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages, San Francisco.
Oxford, R., Young, P. O., Ito, S., & Sumrall, M. (1993). Japanese by satellite: Effects of motivation, language learning styles and strategies, gender, course level, and previous language learning experience on Japanese language achievement. Foreign Language Annals, 26, 359-71.
Partington, A. (1998). Patterns and meaning: Using corpora for English language
research and teaching. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Prince, A. & Smolensky, P. (1993) Optimality theory: constraint interaction
in generative grammar. Ms., Rutgers University, New Brunswick University,
and University of Colorado, Boulder. [To appear as Technical report no. 2,
Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press].
Quirk, R. (1972). A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
Rissanen, M. (1999). Isn't it? or is it not? On the order of postverbal subject and negative particle in the history of English. In I. T. Ostade, G. Tottie, & W. Wurff. (Eds.), Negation in the history of English (pp. 189-205). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sadock, J. M. (1974). Towards a linguistic theory of speech acts. New York: Academic Press.
Semino, E. (2004). Corpus stylistics: speech, writing and thought presentation in a
Senses of Cinema. (2003). Feature Articles in Issue 27. Don’t Fence Me In: Reading Beyond Genre by Robert Briggs
Shao, J. M. (1996). The study of modern Chinese question. East China Normal University Press.
Shastri, S. V. (1988). The Kolhapur Corpus of Indian English and work done on its basis so far. ICAME Journal, 12, 15-26.
Sheorey, R. (1999). An examination of language learning strategy use in the setting of an indigenized variety of English. System, 27, 173-190.
Shih, H. C. (2008, September 18). Hanyu Pinyin to be standard system in 2009. Taipei Times, p. 2.
Sinclair, J. (1987).Collins Cobuild English Language Dictionary. London: William Collins Sons & Co Ltd.
Sinclair, J. (1992). The automatic analysis of corpora. In Svartvik (1992): 379-397.
Stenström, A., Andersen, G., & Hasund, I. K. (2002). Trends in teenage talk. Corpus compilation, analysis and findings. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Stubbs, M. & Gerbig, A. (1993). Human and Inhuman Geography: On the Computer-Assisted Analysis of Long Texts. In: M. Hoey (ed.), Data, Description, Discourse. Papers on the English Language in honour of John McH Sinclair on his sixtieth birthday. London: Harper Collins, pp. 64-85.
Svartvik, J. (1992). The London-Lund Corpus of Spoken English: Description and Research. Lund: Lund Studies in English 82. Lund University Press.
Tabata, T. (2002). Circular wall jet issuing along a cylinder. Journal of Flow Visualization and Image Processing, 9, 899-5193.
Tang, T. C. (1981). Interrogatives in Mandarin Chinese. Bulletin of National Normal University, 26, 219-77.
Tang, T. C. (1996). Studies on Chinese morphology and syntax. Taipei: Student Book Company.
Tottie, G. & Hoffmann, S.. (2006). Tag questions in British and American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 34:4, 283–311.
Tottie, G., & Hoffmann, S. (2006). Tag questions in British and American English. Journal of English Linguistics, 34(4), 283-311.
Tottie, G.., & Hoffmann, S. (2006). Tag questions in British and American English. Journal of English Linguistics 34(4), 283-311.
Tran, T.V. (1988). Gender differences in English language acculturation and learning strategies among Vietnamese adults aged 40 and over in the United States. Gender Roles, 19, 747-758.
Ukaji, M. (1998). Tag questions in Early modern English. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Manchester.
Wang, W. (1965). Two aspect markers in Mandarin. Language, 41, 457-70.
Wikberg, K. (1975). Yes-No Questions and Answers in Shakespeare's Plays. A Study in Text Linguistics. Acta Academiae Aboensis, Ser. A. Humaniora. Vol. 51 (1).
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. Tag question. Retrieved November 16, 2008, from
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tag_question
World-Wide, 9(2), 171-191.
Wu, P. (1978). A semantic study of Chinese interrogatives. Unpublished master’s thesis, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taiwan.
Xu, L. (1990). Remarks on LF movement in Chinese questions. Linguistics 28: 355-382.
Young, D. J. & Oxford, R. (1997). A gender-related analysis of strategies used to process written input in the native language and a foreign language. Applied Language Learning, 8, 1-20.
Zoubir-Shaw, S., & Oxford, R.L. (1995). Gender differences in language learning strategy use in university-level introductory French classes. In Klee, C.A. (Ed). Faces in a crowd: The individual learner in multisession courses (pp. 181-213). Boston: Heinle.

 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：741（臺灣：735，外國：6） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1885225 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67700053
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上